Dataset Information

User perception of a new hydrophilic-coated male urinary catheter for intermittent use.

ABSTRACT: Aims:This study investigated user perception and adherence related to a hydrophilic-coated urinary catheter (LoFric® Origo™), available for male patients who practice intermittent catheterization. Design:The study had a prospective observational design, including patients from 19 European hospitals. Methods:A total of 416 patients were eligible for the study; 179 experienced catheter users and 237 de novo. Two questionnaires were filled out, one describing background data and a second, 8 weeks later, evaluating catheter features. Results:The response rate for the second questionnaire was 88% (365 patients). Patients evaluating the new catheter showed a general satisfaction rate of 81% and 72% kept using it. The hygienic grip of the catheter was appreciated by 85% and the foldable feature by 67%. The results show that convenience, ease of use, and hygienic factors are patient-preferred features for a urinary catheter. These factors were confirmed for the evaluated hydrophilic-coated catheter.

SUBMITTER: Koeter I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6279713 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

User perception of a new hydrophilic-coated male urinary catheter for intermittent use.

Koeter Ingrid I Stensröd Gro G Hunsbedt Nilsen Aud A Lund Rigmor R Haslam Colette C De Sèze Marianne M Sriram Rajagopalan R Heesakkers John J

Nursing open 20180904 1

<h4>Aims</h4>This study investigated user perception and adherence related to a hydrophilic-coated urinary catheter (LoFric® Origo™), available for male patients who practice intermittent catheterization.<h4>Design</h4>The study had a prospective observational design, including patients from 19 European hospitals.<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 416 patients were eligible for the study; 179 experienced catheter users and 237 de novo. Two questionnaires were filled out, one describing background data a ...[more]

PMID: 30534401

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the most effective and cost effective type of catheter for patients performing intermittent self catheterisation in the community.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis. Results were incorporated into a probabilistic Markov model to compare lifetime costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs).Data sourcesWe searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane and Cinahl databases from 2002 to 18 April 2011 to identify studies comparing hydrophilic, gel reservoir, and non-coated intermittent catheters. Earlier guidelines were used to identify papers published before 2002. To capture studies comparing clean and sterile non-coated intermittent self catheterisation, each database was searched from its date of inception to 18 April 2011.Main outcome measuresClinical outcomes included symptomatic urinary tract infection (UTI), bacteraemia, mortality, patient preference or comfort, and number of catheters used. The economic model included downstream complications of UTI and cost effectiveness was calculated as incremental cost per QALY gained.ResultsEight studies were included in the systematic review. Most were conducted in patients with spinal cord injuries, and most of the included patients were men. People using gel reservoir and hydrophilic catheters were significantly less likely to report one or more UTIs compared with sterile non-coated catheters (absolute effect for gel reservoir = 149 fewer per 1000 (95% confidence interval -7 to 198), P=0.04; absolute effect for hydrophilic = 153 fewer per 1000 (-8 to 268), P=0.04). However, there was no difference between hydrophilic and sterile non-coated catheters when outcomes were measured as mean monthly UTIs (mean difference = 0.01 (-0.11 to 0.09), P=0.84) or total UTIs at 1 year (mean difference = 0.18 (-0.50 to 0.86), P=0.60). There was little difference in the incidence of one or more UTIs for people using clean versus sterile non-coated catheters (absolute effect = 12 fewer per 1000 (-134 to 146), P=0.86). Although the most effective, gel reservoir catheters cost >£54,350 per QALY gained and are therefore not cost effective compared with clean non-coated self catheterisation.ConclusionThe type of catheter used for intermittent self catheterisation seems to make little difference to the risk of symptomatic UTI. Given large differences in resource use, clean non-coated catheters are most cost effective. However, because of limitations and gaps in the evidence base and the designation of non-coated catheters as single use devices, we recommend a precautionary principle should be adopted and that patients should be offered a choice between hydrophilic and gel reservoir catheters.

Project description:ObjectivesTo elucidate the views of intermittent catheter (IC) users regarding urinary tract infection (UTI) symptom presentation, terminology for describing signs and symptoms, the cause of UTI and management strategies.DesignQualitative study with semi-structured interviews. The transcribed text was analysed thematically.Setting12 general practitioner (GP) surgeries in Hampshire and Dorset, UK.ParticipantsA convenience sample of 30 IC users, aged over 18, using IC for at least 3 months who had at least one self-reported UTI since starting IC.ResultsParticipants reported a variety of signs and symptoms, such as urine cloudiness and smell, as indicators of UTI. The terms used often differed from those in the modified National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) symptom set. IC users had difficulty distinguishing possible UTI symptoms from those of their comorbidities. They expressed uncertainty about the cause of UTI, often attributing it to poor hygiene and lifestyle behaviours. Whereas some viewed UTI as an expected consequence of IC use that could be self-managed, others felt more concerned and were more reliant on their GP for support. A range of management strategies was described, including drinking more fluids, increased attention to personal hygiene and self-medicating with antibiotics.ConclusionsThere is uncertainty among IC users about UTI signs and symptoms and when to seek help. Individual accounts of UTI fitted generally within the modified NIDRR descriptors but adopted less technical and more 'lay' language. IC users' descriptions of UTI signs and symptoms can lack precision, owing partly to the presence of underlying health conditions. This, together with differing levels of concern about the need to seek help and self-medication with antibiotics, presents challenges for the GP. This study provides the basis for developing a self-help tool which may aid identification of UTI and enhance communication with healthcare professionals.

Project description:BackgroundIn hospitals, catheter acquired urinary tract infection causes significant resource waste and discomfort among admitted patients. An intervention for reducing indwelling catheterisations - No-CAUTI - was trialled across four hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. No-CAUTI includes: train-the-trainer workshops, site champions, compliance audits, and point prevalence surveys. The trial showed reductions on usual care catheterisation rates at 4- and 9-month post-intervention. This result was statistically non-significant; and post-intervention catheterisation rates rebounded between 4 and 9 months. However, No-CAUTI showed statistically significant catheterisation decreases for medical wards, female patients and for short-term catheterisations. This study presents a budget impact analysis of a projected five year No-CAUTI roll out across New South Wales public hospitals, from the cost perspective of the New South Wales Ministry of Health.MethodsBudget forecasts were made for five year roll outs of: i) No-CAUTI; and ii) usual care, among all public hospitals in New South Wales hosting overnight stays (n=180). The roll out design maintains intervention effectiveness with ongoing workshops, quality audits, and hospital surveys. Forecasts of catheterisations, procedures and treatments were modelled on No-CAUTI trial observations. Costs were sourced from trial records, the Medical Benefits Scheme, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and public wage awards. Cost and parameter uncertainties were considered with sensitivity scenarios.ResultsThe estimated five-year No-CAUTI roll-out cost was $1.5 million. It had an overall budget saving of $640,000 due to reductions of 100,100 catheterisations, 33,300 urine tests and 6,700 antibiotics administrations. Non-Metropolitan hospitals had a net saving of $1.2 million, while Metropolitan hospitals had a net cost of $0.54 million.ConclusionsCompared to usual care, NO-CAUTI is expected to realise overall budget savings and decreases in catheterisations over five years. These findings allow a consideration of the affordability of a wide implementation.Trial registrationRegistered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12617000090314 ). First registered 17 January 2017, retrospectively. First enrolment, 15/11/2016.

Project description:Preventing catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), a common health care-associated infection, is important for improving the care of hospitalized patients and in meeting the goals for reduction of health care-associated infections set by the US Department of Health and Human Services.To identify ways to enhance CAUTI prevention efforts based on the experiences of hospitals participating in the Michigan Health and Hospital Association Keystone Center for Patient Safety statewide program to reduce unnecessary use of urinary catheters (the Bladder Bundle).Qualitative assessment of data collected through semistructured telephone interviews with key informants at 12 hospitals and in-person interviews and site visits at 3 of the 12 hospitals. The analysis focused on perceptions and key issues identified by hospitals as influencing implementation of CAUTI prevention practices as recommended by the Bladder Bundle initiative.Twelve purposefully sampled hospitals in Michigan.Key informants including infection preventionists, clinical personnel, and senior executives.Common barriers to Bladder Bundle implementation and appropriate urinary catheter use included (1) difficulty with nurse and physician engagement, (2) patient and family request for indwelling catheters, and (3) catheter insertion practices and customs in the emergency department. Strategies to address these barriers were also identified by several of the participating hospitals, including (1) incorporating urinary management (eg, planned toileting) as part of other patient safety programs, such as a fall reduction program, (2) explicitly discussing the risks of indwelling urinary catheters with patients and families, and (3) engaging with emergency department nurses and physicians to implement a process that ensures that appropriate indications for catheter use are followed.The Bladder Bundle program provides a model for implementing strategies to reduce CAUTI. These findings provide actionable information to inform CAUTI prevention-related activities in hospitals throughout the country.

Dataset Information

User perception of a new hydrophilic-coated male urinary catheter for intermittent use.

Publications

User perception of a new hydrophilic-coated male urinary catheter for intermittent use.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets